The Quality Improvement Knowledge Application Tool Revised (QIKAT-R)

被引:78
作者
Singh, Mamta K. [1 ]
Ogrinc, Greg [2 ,3 ]
Cox, Karen R. [4 ]
Dolansky, Mary [5 ]
Brandt, Julie [6 ]
Morrison, Laura J. [7 ]
Harwood, Beth [3 ]
Petroski, Greg [6 ]
West, Al [8 ]
Headrick, Linda A. [6 ]
机构
[1] Case Western Reserve Univ, Div Gen Med, Louis Stokes Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[2] VA Med Ctr, White River Jct, VT USA
[3] Geisel Sch Med, Hanover, NH USA
[4] Univ Missouri Hlth Care, Off Clin Effectiveness, Columbia, MO USA
[5] Case Western Reserve Univ, Frances Payne Bolton Sch Nursing, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[6] Univ Missouri, Sch Med, Columbia, MO USA
[7] Baylor Coll Med, Div Geriatr, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[8] VA Med Ctr, Dept Vet Affairs, White River Jct, VT USA
关键词
CURRICULUM; RESIDENTS;
D O I
10.1097/ACM.0000000000000456
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Purpose Quality improvement (QI) has been part of medical education for over a decade. Assessment of QI learning remains challenging. The Quality Improvement Knowledge Application Tool (QIKAT), developed a decade ago, is widely used despite its subjective nature and inconsistent reliability. From 2009 to 2012, the authors developed and assessed the validation of a revised QIKAT, the "QIKAT-R." Method Phase 1: Using an iterative, consensus-building process, a national group of QI educators developed a scoring rubric with defined language and elements. Phase 2: Five scorers pilot tested the QIKAT-R to assess validity and inter-and intrarater reliability using responses to four scenarios, each with three different levels of response quality: " excellent," "fair," and "poor." Phase 3: Eighteen scorers from three countries used the QIKAT-R to assess the same sets of student responses. Results Phase 1: The QI educators developed a nine-point scale that uses dichotomous answers (yes/no) for each of three QIKAT-R subsections: Aim, Measure, and Change. Phase 2: The QIKAT-R showed strong discrimination between "poor" and "excellent" responses, and the intra- and interrater reliability were strong. Phase 3: The discriminative validity of the instrument remained strong between excellent and poor responses. The intraclass correlation was 0.66 for the total nine-point scale. Conclusions The QIKAT-R is a user-friendly instrument that maintains the content and construct validity of the original QIKAT but provides greatly improved interrater reliability. The clarity within the key subsections aligns the assessment closely with QI knowledge application for students and residents.
引用
收藏
页码:1386 / 1391
页数:6
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, 2000, TOOLB ASS METH
[2]  
[Anonymous], MAINT CERT COMP CRIT
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2013, ACGME COMM PROGR REQ
[4]   Training Psychiatry Residents in Quality Improvement: An Integrated, Year-Long Curriculum [J].
Arbuckle, Melissa R. ;
Weinberg, Michael ;
Cabaniss, Deborah L. ;
Kistler, Susan C. ;
Isaacs, Abby J. ;
Sederer, Lloyd I. ;
Essock, Susan M. .
ACADEMIC PSYCHIATRY, 2013, 37 (01) :42-45
[5]   Effectiveness of teaching quality improvement to clinicians - A systematic review [J].
Boonyasai, Romsai T. ;
Windish, Donna M. ;
Chakraborti, Chayan ;
Feldman, Leonard S. ;
Rubin, Haya R. ;
Bass, Eric B. .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2007, 298 (09) :1023-U39
[6]   Validity and usefulness of members reports of implementation progress in a quality improvement initiative: findings from the Team Check-up Tool (TCT) [J].
Chan, Kitty S. ;
Hsu, Yea-Jen ;
Lubomski, Lisa H. ;
Marsteller, Jill A. .
IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2011, 6
[7]  
Dolansky M, SYSTEMS THINKING SCA
[8]  
Doran G.T., 1981, Management Review. AMA FORUM, V70, p35 36
[9]  
Hall Leslie W, 2009, Qual Manag Health Care, V18, P194, DOI 10.1097/QMH.0b013e3181aea249
[10]  
Hamer RM, COMPUTE 6 INTRACLASS